Analysis of Neurophysiological Reactions to Advertising ...neurospire.com/pdfs/Ohme.pdf · Analysis of Neurophysiological Reactions to Advertising Stimuli ... by using electroencephalography

Analysis of Neurophysiological Reactions to Advertising Stimuliby Means of EEG and Galvanic Skin Response Measures

Rafal OhmePolish Academy of Sciences

Dorota ReykowskaLaboratory & Co., Warsaw, Poland

Dawid WienerAdam Mickiewicz University

Anna ChoromanskaUniversity of Warsaw

This article demonstrates how marketing may benefit from neurophysiology. The authorsdiscuss a particular research case concerning the analysis of a skin care product advertise-ment. Pretests of 2 versions of this TV ad revealed that, although the versions were almostidentical, each of them generated significantly different impact. Their influence wasassessed using both cognitive measures (benefits and key benefits recall) and behavioralmeasures (shelf test). The only difference between these 2 versions of the ad was in a singlescene that contained a particular gesture by a female model. Of note, the gesture appearedto enhance the effectiveness of the ad. The authors tested whether neurophysiologicalmeasures can capture differences in consumer reactions to slightly different marketingstimuli. Indeed, by using electroencephalography and electromyography and by monitoringskin conductance, the authors were able to register significant differences in neurophysio-logical reactions to an altered scene, even though the difference was not consciously seen.The authors believe that neurophysiological measures soon will be widely acknowledgedand used as a complimentary method in classical marketing research.

Keywords: marketing, neuromarketing, EEG, advertising, consumer research

Research Context

An international corporation asked a marketresearch company to pretest two versions of theirTV spot. The research demonstrated that, althoughthe two versions were almost identical, their ef-fects on brand and product perception were sig-nificantly different, and these differences wereeven more pronounced in a behavioral test. Theseresults were a great surprise both to the corpora-tion and to the research company. How could sucha subtle change between two versions, almost

impossible to notice consciously, make such adifference in ad effectiveness?

The differences in the two versions had beendeveloped intuitively by the director and hiscrew during the shooting. The major differenceconcerned the way in which a female model waspresented during one particular scene that tookplace between the 21st and 25th seconds of thespot. In Version 1, only the model’s face waspresented; conversely, in Version 2, the viewerssaw her face from a slightly different angle(for 2.5 s), and then she made a particular man-ual gesture (for 1.5 s). First, she touched herface with the back of her right hand, and thenwhen viewers could see her whole body, shemade a delicate hand movement and touchedher stomach. It is interesting that the differencebetween the ads was almost undistinguishableon the conscious level (as was depicted in apostexperimental interview).

The laboratory experiment performed by themarketing research company had been conductedon 120 women, ages 20–55, who had been re-cruited randomly from the product category target

Rafal Ohme, Institute of Psychology, Polish Academy ofSciences; Dorota Reykowska, Laboratory & Co.; DawidWiener, Institute of Psychology, Adam Mickiewicz Univer-sity; Anna Choromanska, Institute for Social Studies, Uni-versity of Warsaw.

Rafal Ohme is the founder of the Human Mind and BrainApplied Research Center, which aims to adopt scientificmethods for commercial application.

Correspondence concerning this article should be ad-dressed to Rafal Ohme, Institute of Psychology, PolishAcademy of Sciences, Chodakowska 19/31, PL 03-815Warsaw, Poland. E-mail: [email protected]

Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics © 2009 American Psychological Association2009, Vol. 2, No. 1, 21–31 1937-321X/09/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0015462

21

group. Forty women watched Version 1 of the ad(model’s face only), another 40 watched Ver-sion 2 of the ad (model’s face and the gesture),and the final 40 women were allocated to thecontrol group (did not watch the tested ad at all).A cover story procedure was used to induce low-involvement processing of the presented ads(Ohme & Pyl, 2006). Respondents were asked towatch a TV show and then to participate in adiscussion. The program was interrupted by threecommercial breaks, each containing 16 TV ads(all of them—besides the tested ad—serving asdistracter stimuli). All ads were presented twice(the two tested ads were placed within the first andthird commercial breaks).

We did not find significant differences be-tween the responses of the two experimentalgroups in ad recall (see Figure 1). There were,however, differences in the level of knowl-edge regarding product benefits and key ben-efits (see Table 1). The second version (withthe manual gesture) produced significantlyhigher scores for all these dimensions. More-over, it had a greater impact on the results ofa behavioral test (administered as the laststage of the study). Respondents who saw thesecond version chose the advertised productas a complimentary gift (out of a choice ofthree brands from the category) significantlymore often than those who were in the controlgroup (see Figure 2).

The results of the ad pretest showed that evena slight difference, of a noninformative natureand thus not explicated in the strategic position-ing of the product, can significantly enhancemarketing communication.

Are there any instruments that allow us to studysuch minor creative alterations? Because people

are not able to consciously detect the difference,they would not be able to give opinions about it.Increasingly more marketers are starting to realizethat traditional marketing methods face tremen-dous problems in terms of measuring the subcon-scious, intuitive, and purely emotional aspects ofcommunication with consumers (Braidot, 2005;Kenning, Plassmann, & Ahlert, 2007). We believethat, to better explore consumer emotions, atten-tion, and memory, we must reach to the very coreof the human cognition system; that is, directly tothe human brain (Damasio, 1994; LeDoux, 1996;Zaltman, 2003).

On the basis of the aforementioned findings,one might conclude that, although respondentswere unaware of it, their brains must have regis-tered slight differences between the two versionsof the ad to eventually produce such behavioralresults. To verify this assumption, we decided toconduct an exploratory study in which we wouldcompare neurophysiological reactions of respon-dents to one particular moment differentiating thetwo versions of the ad. We were concerned withrespondents’ emotional reactions and arousal levelinduced by the altered scene. As we were to in-vestigate a 4-s fragment of a TV advertisement,we decided to apply brain waves, facial muscleanalysis, and skin conductance (SC) analysis.Electroencephalography (EEG) has the benefit ofvery high temporal resolution; therefore, changesin brain activity can be monitored second bysecond.

Theoretical Background

The main method used in this study is EEG. Itregisters variations in brain waves produced bythe cortex. Interest in using EEG for market re-search goes back to the early 1970s; but the firstregular studies started to appear during the 1980s.In 1985, Linda F. Alwitt published a study onadvertisement content using EEG. She concludedthat “the results of this analysis are an encouragingfirst look at the relationship between ongoingevents and EEG-recorded brain reactions. Thetopic certainly warrants future research” (Alwitt,1985, p. 216). EEG research on advertising hasprovided empirical evidence that certain aspectsof consumer cognition and emotional response toadvertisement messages (even below the level ofconscious awareness) can be monitored success-fully in real time and analyzed. However, Olsonand Ray (1985) posited that EEG responses toFigure 1. Ad recall.

22 OHME, REYKOWSKA, WIENER, AND CHOROMANSKA

advertising only provide useful information if theytest specific hypotheses about the processes usedby viewers of TV advertisements. Thus, EEG wasnot considered to be helpful as a general evalua-tive measure of advertising effectiveness.

The difference between these early studiesand the current status of research lies in the easewith which information can be both obtainedand analyzed. Nowadays, computers are muchmore advanced, and we have considerably moresophisticated statistical programs, one of whichis MATLAB, a high-level technical computinglanguage and interactive environment for datavisualization, analysis, and numeric computa-tion. New technical possibilities are a great con-tribution to both basic and applied EEG re-search. More recently, EEG has been applied toassess marketing stimuli such as media involve-ment (Swartz, 1998), the processing of TV com-mercials (Rothschild, Thorson, Reeves, Hirsch,& Goldstein, 1986), and the prediction of mem-ory for components of TV commercials (Roth-schild & Hyun, 1990).

Now, 80 years after its first public demon-stration by Hans Berger, EEG is a very popularmethod used by cognitive neuroscientists, neu-rologists, psychophysiologists and, most re-cently, neuromarketers, as a noninvasive and

relatively inexpensive method for measuringbrain activity. It must be noted, however, thatEEG has limited anatomical specificity, andonly can gather information from the cortex.Nevertheless, a great advantage of this methodlies in its very high temporal resolution. Othertechniques (e.g., functional magnetic resonanceimaging) have time resolution down to a fewseconds, whereas the EEG has submillisecondresolution (Huettel, Song, & McCarthy, 2004).This enables researchers to precisely detectchanges in brain activity that are connected withrapidly changing stimuli (as in TV commer-cials).

The second method described in the study isfacial electromyography (EMG), a techniqueused to evaluate the physiological properties offacial muscles. The three muscles that are stud-ied the most extensively are the corrugatorsupercili, zygomaticus major, and orbicularisocculi. EMG has been considered a powerfulinstrument to test voluntary (zygomaticus) andinvoluntary (corrugator and orbicularis) facialmuscle movements, which may reflect the con-scious and subconscious expression of emo-tions, respectively (Dimberg, Thunberg, &Elmehed, 2000; Larsen, Norris, & Cacioppo,2003). Facial EMG has been used as a methodto study emotional expressions and social com-munication.

Some researchers have managed to success-fully adapt EMG to track down consumer reac-tions to advertising. For instance, Bolls, Lang,and Potter (2001) showed that zygomaticusmuscle activity is stronger during radio adver-tisements with a positive emotional tone,whereas corrugator muscle activity is greaterduring ads with a negative emotional tone.Hazlett and Hazlett (1999) compared emotionalreactions to TV advertisements measured byfacial EMG versus results from self-reportscales. They concluded that, overall, facialEMG is a more sensitive indicator of emotionalFigure 2. Shelf test (behavioral choice).

Table 1Percentages of Respondents With Knowledge of Benefits

Unaided opinions specification

Version 1 Version 2 Base value

Benefits Key benefits Benefits Key benefits Benefits Key benefits

Benefit 1 56.1 31.7 69.2 48.7 15.0 10.0Benefit 2 41.5 14.6 64.1 43.6 7.5 5.0

23ANALYSIS OF REACTIONS TO AD STIMULI

reactions to TV advertisements than self-reportand that facial EMG responses are closely re-lated to emotion-congruent events during ads.Their results also indicate that, when comparedwith self-reports, facial EMG measures aremore related to brand recall measures adminis-tered 5 days later.

In our research, we decided to use one addi-tional measure of neurophysiological reac-tions—the measurement of skin conductance(SC). This method is based on the analysis ofsubtle changes in galvanic skin response whenthe autonomic nervous system (ANS) is acti-vated. Because an increase in the activation ofthe ANS is an indicator of arousal, SC can beused as a measure of such arousal (Ravaja,2004).

In advertising research, the measurement ofSC has been scarce. Some advertising research-ers, while testing other emotion measurementmethods, have used SC measurement merely asa validation tool (Aaker, Stayman, & Hagerty,1986; Bolls et al., 2001). On the basis of inter-views with market researchers who have ap-plied SC on one hand and practitioner casestudies on the other hand, LaBarbera and Tuc-ciarone (1995) concluded that, overall, SCseems to predict market performance better thanself-report measures. They formulated impor-tant guidelines concerning equipment and sta-tistical formulas that need to be taken into con-sideration when designing SC research.

Moreover, LaBarbera and Tucciarone (1995)argued that many previous SC studies in adver-tising (mostly conducted during the 1960s)failed to identify any effects of SC because theylacked adequately sensitive equipment and ac-curate statistical protocols. Therefore, these re-searchers were unable to separate “noise” fromtrue arousal response. Also, individual variationis apparent when analyzing SC. Fortunately,today, technological advancements and morecomplex statistical programs help to overcomesuch difficulties. The major limitation of SCthat remains unsolved is that it cannot determinethe direction or the valence of an emotionalreaction. It merely measures the degree ofarousal, which can be either positive or negativein valence: Both very pleasurable and very re-pellant advertising stimuli can evoke large SCresponses (Hopkins & Fletcher, 1994).

Theoretical Framework

In this chapter, we briefly describe David-son’s model of emotion, which provides a the-oretical framework for studying emotions withEEG measures, as well as Cacioppo’s and Dim-berg’s research on the relationships betweenfacial muscle activity and the valence of expe-rienced emotions.

Almost 30 years ago, Davidson and his col-leagues (Davidson, Schwartz, Saron, Bennett,& Goleman, 1979) suggested a model of emo-tion in which they argued that emotions are (a)organized around approach–avoidance tenden-cies, and (b) differentially lateralized in thefrontal region of the brain. Generally speaking,the left frontal area is involved in the experienceof positive emotions such as joy, interest, andhappiness; the experience of positive affect fa-cilitates and maintains approach behaviors. Theright frontal region is involved in the experienceof negative emotions such as fear, disgust, andsadness; the experience of negative emotionsfacilitates and maintains withdrawal behaviors.

Using EEG measures to index ongoing fron-tal brain electrical activity during the processingof different affects, Davidson and Fox foundsubstantial empirical support for the model inadults and infants (for a review, see Davidson,1993a, 1993b; Davidson & Rickman, 1999;Fox, 1991). Greater relative left frontal EEGactivity is routinely associated with the process-ing of positive affects (e.g., while viewing filmclips containing pleasant scenes), whereasgreater relative right frontal EEG activity isconsistently linked with the processing of neg-ative affects (e.g., while viewing film clips con-taining unpleasant scenes; Jones & Fox, 1992).In addition, the motivational tendencies of ap-proach and avoidance that underlie differenttypes of emotion are known to be distinguish-able on frontal EEG asymmetry measures. Sut-ton and Davidson (1997), for example, foundthat adults with greater relative left frontal EEGactivity are likely to score high on psychometricmeasures of approach-related tendencies.

To date, numerous studies have examined therelationship between emotion or emotion-related constructs and asymmetries in EEG ac-tivity over the frontal cortex. A review of thesestudies clearly suggests the existence of asym-metries in frontal EEG activity, includingresting levels of activity and state-related acti-


vation. These asymmetries are ubiquitous andinvolved, both in trait predispositions to re-spond to emotional stimuli related to moderat-ing function of the prefrontal cortex and inchanges in emotional state, which can be treatedas a marker of emotional intensity (Coan &Allen, 2003).

Moreover, Richard Davidson pointed out thatmuch of the research on frontal EEG asymmetryhas examined the correlates of variations inasymmetry with self-report measures:

While these reported associations have been interest-ing, they typically are not informative with regard tomechanisms, because the specific types of process af-fected by prefrontal function are likely themselves tobe opaque to self-report. Thus, while they influenceself-report (like variations in the time to recovery fol-lowing a negative event), they are not themselves con-sciously accessible; consequently, such self-reportmeasures ultimately would be uninformative if wehope to construct a neurologically driven theory.(Davidson, 2004, p. 230)

EMG also has a long history of research inthe context of emotions. Several researchershave scientifically validated the EMG methodas a signal of both emotional valence and theintensity of emotions (Cacioppo, Petty, Losch,& Kim, 1986). EMG measurements have beenconducted with different stimulus types: for ex-ample, pictures (Cacioppo et al., 1986; Dim-berg, 1986; Dimberg, Hansson, & Thunberg,1998;Lang, Greenwald, Bradley, & Hamm,1993), subliminal priming (de Groot, 1996;Dimberg et al., 2000; Rotteveel, de Groot,Geutskens, & Phaf, 2001), sounds (Bradley &Lang, 2000; Dimberg, 1990), words (Hietanen,Surakka, & Linnankoski, 1998), and imagery(Schwartz, Fair, Salt, Mandel, & Klerman,1976). A common reaction pattern has beenobtained. More intensive corrugator activityand less zygomaticus activity are obtained asa reaction to negative stimuli versus positivestimuli.

Method

We conducted the present study using EEG,EMG, and SC measurements to analyzewhether there are any significant differences infrontal cortex, facial muscle activity, andarousal level on watching two versions of thestimulus material.

We hypothesized that a statistically signifi-cant difference would be apparent between the

“gesture” and “no-gesture” scenes in terms ofrespondents’ emotional reactions and arousallevel. Emotional reactions were expected to beindicated by changes in electric activity withinthe left and right frontal cortex and in facialmuscle activity (zygomatic, corrugator, and or-bicularis). Arousal level was expected to beregistered by changes in SC. Because of thestudy’s exploratory nature, only bidirectionalhypotheses were proposed.

The two versions of the scene formed anindependent variable, described on two levels:special gesture (Version 2) and no special ges-ture (Version 1). Dependent variables com-prised EEG, EMG, and SC data.

For the recordings, we used a 16-channelContact Precision Instruments amplifier.Electrodes were located in accordance withthe 10 –20 International Electrode PlacementSystem (Cacioppo, Tassinary, & Berntson,2000). Recordings were obtained from theprefrontal, frontal, temporal, parietal, and oc-cipital regions. The EEG signal was recordedcontinuously with a sampling rate of 1000 Hzduring presentation of the TV spots. The sig-nal was filtered (0.1-Hz to 40-Hz bandpassfilter and a 50-Hz notch filter). Independentcomponent analysis was applied to removeartifacts generated by muscles or any externalsources. As a next step, data were down-sampled to 512 Hz. Artifact-free and down-sampled data were transformed into a time-frequency domain by means of fast Fouriertransformation (Hanning window, nonover-lapped) providing estimates of the powerspectral density with 1-Hz resolution withinthe frequency domain. The power spectraldensity for each EEG channel was then com-puted, both for the whole ads and for theirspecific sequences.

The EMG was measured by miniature Ag/AgCl electrodes from the corrugator supercili,zygomaticus major, and orbicularis occuli mus-cles on the left side of the face. The electrodeswere placed in a bipolar fashion, in accordancewith directions published by Fridlund andCacioppo (1986). Muscle activity signals weredigitalized and preprocessed (filtered,smoothed, and down-sampled to 32 Hz). Arti-fact rejection was based on the physical prop-erties of the registered signal, as well as onstatistical analysis within and between partici-


Jake

Highlight

pants. Muscle activity was evaluated both forthe whole ads and for specific sequences.

The SC was measured using standard 9-mmdiameter Ag/AgCl electrodes placed on the dis-tal phalanx of both the forefinger and middlefinger of the left hand. A reference electrodewas placed on the left forearm. Preprocessingincluded filtering and down-sampling to 32 Hz.Differential analysis, wavelet transformation,and other mathematical and statistical toolswere used to transform the signal.

Procedure

The research was conducted on 45 femalerespondents, ages 25–35, with above-averageincomes. The income was at least 2,000 PLNand above; the respondents were recruited bymeeting the minimal amount (2,000 PLN). Toenhance the practical value of our research, wewanted to ensure that the study was conductedon the target group for the advertised product.Respondents were invited to participate in astudy on neurophysiological reactions to adver-tising, and they were paid for their participation.They were asked to watch a series of advertise-ments while their EEG, EMG, and SC responseswere registered. A within-participant designwas used; each participant was presented withtwo versions of the tested ad and 10 distracterads, with a 15-s black screen in between. All ads(including distracters and both versions of thetested ad) were presented randomly, and theversions’ order of appearance was rotated. Weundertook special precautions not to place thetwo alternative versions near each other. Beforethe exposition of each ad, a baseline was mea-sured as a reaction to the black screen. Theexperiment was conducted in a room adapted toneurophysiological studies, and all ads wereshown on a computer screen. During expositionof the stimuli, respondents were left alone; how-ever, their behavior was monitored constantlyby a video camera. The participants’ only taskwas to watch the films presented on the screen.On completion of the test, participants wereinterviewed and thoroughly debriefed.

Results

We analyzed results by comparing both ver-sions of the ad in time (second by second), aswell as by comparing the results for the whole

differentiating scene. Before these comparisons,we conducted an analysis to identify any possi-ble differences in responses to the scenes fromthis ad that occur before the altered scene. Asthese parts were identical in both versions, nosignificant differences in EEG, EMG, and SCactivity were discovered. Reactions to the dif-ferentiating scenes were analyzed using Stu-dent’s t tests and Pearson’s linear correlationanalysis. The results from these analyses arepresented here.

We focused on comparing the emotionalresponse to both versions of the ad, measured(in accordance with Davidson’s model) by thedifference in the amount of alpha between theleft and right hemispheres taken from thefrontal and prefrontal electrodes (Davidson etal., 1979). When analyzing emotional brainreactions to each second of the spot, we ob-tained a significant difference during the 22ndsecond of the ad, t(43) � 2.047, p � .01; seeFigure 3). The scene from Version 1 (only themodel’s face) evoked more positive emotionsthan the scene from Version 2 (the model’sface and the hand gesture). There were nosignificant differences in the scenes that fol-lowed the altered scene. We observed a verystrong, negative correlation between the twoad versions at the 23rd second (Pearson’s r ��0.92, p � .001), whereas the correlationbetween the ad versions taken as a whole alsowas significant but positive and quite weak(r � .13, p � .001; see Figure 4).

The results of EMG reveal a trend toward asignificant difference in electrical facial activitywhile watching the alternative scenes of the ad.We obtained a difference within the activity ofthe corrugator supercili. During the differenti-ating scene (from the 23rd second until the endof the spot), the second version of the ad pro-voked a higher level of corrugator muscle ac-tivity than did the first version, t(48) � 1.717,p � .09 (see Figure 5). However, for othermuscles, there were no differences.

Analysis of SC revealed differences in theaverage level of arousal across the entire differ-entiating scene (from 21.5 to 24.5 s). We ob-served significantly greater arousal during thisscene in the second ad version, t(43) � 2.047,p � .05 (see Figure 6). When analyzing thetrace of arousal in time, similar results wereobserved during the 22nd second of the ad. Thedifference between the versions did not reach


statistical significance but did show a trend,t(43) � 1.826, p � .07 (see Figure 7).

Discussion

At a general level, the results confirmed ourhypothesis that the brain can register evensmall differences between the ads and thatthis can be captured by the apparatus we used.

The registration of EEG, EMG, and SC sig-nals enabled identification of different neuro-physiological patterns of functioning of thebrain and facial muscles connected with emo-tions and arousal during contact with twominimally different versions of the same ad.Our study shows that a consumer’s brain canproduce different reactions to incoming mar-keting stimuli, even if, at the conscious level,

Figure 3. Electroencephalography trace of emotional response.

Figure 4. Electroencephalography trace of emotional response correlation for the 23rd second.


people do not recognize any difference be-tween them.

Because of the exploratory nature of thestudy, its results must be considered observa-tional. A detailed discussion, including possibleexplanations concerning particular reaction pat-terns and their theoretical implications, wouldbe premature at this time. Having said this, wealready have launched procedural and concep-tual replications, so that we ultimately may pro-vide more conclusive results and more ad-vanced discussion (i.e., at an interpretativelevel) in the near future. At this point, however,anything that goes beyond systemic observationmight be entering controversial and speculativegrounds.

Three conclusions of a more general naturestem from our research. First, we managed toconfirm Alwitt’s (1985) notion that EEG re-search in the advertising field can providemeaningful empirical evidence and that certainaspects of consumer emotional responses to ad-vertising messages can be monitored success-fully in real time and analyzed. It has beenshown that EEG, EMG, and SC indeed cantrack down very subtle alterations occurring athigh speed during a TV advertisement.

Second, we believe that Olson and Ray’s(1985) opinion that EEG reactions are not likelyto be helpful as a general evaluative measure ofadvertising effectiveness should be modified.Their belief may be true but only when one testsa single ad without any reference objects athand. However, when such reference objects doexist (e.g., alterative shooting of the same scene

or use of a different soundtrack), it may bepossible to identify which one induces a greaterdegree of emotional response or arousal. There-fore, we may, to some extent, evaluate creativeor strategic solutions used in TV advertise-ments. In other words, EEG, at this point of itsdevelopment, still cannot serve as an absolutemeasure; however, it already may provide use-ful direction as a reference measure.

Finally, we suggest that EEG be applied inparallel with EMG and SC. Combining EEGwith EMG again confirmed Davidson’s conceptof emotions and yielded proof that EEG analy-sis is a valid measure of emotional valence. Inturn, combining EEG with SC enables us todetermine not only the intensity but also thedirection of arousal (see discussion by Hopkins& Fletcher, 1994).

Practical Implications

We believe that EEG, EMG, and SC maywell serve as complimentary tools to fMRI inthe analysis of the quality of marketing com-munications (Cacioppo et al., 2000). Unlikeneuroimaging approach, which is mostly spa-tially oriented, EEG and EMG may provideinformation of a temporal nature. Therefore,marketers would be afforded an instrument withwhich to evaluate their TV advertisements, notonly at a synthetic, general level but also at ananalytic, sequential level. They also might beable to venture beyond consumer declarations.

However, as posited by Plassmann, Ambler,Braeutigam, and Kenning (2007), it is important

Figure 5. Electromyography corrugator response (aver-aged response from 23 to 35 s).

Figure 6. Arousal level (averaged skin conductance re-sponse from 21.5 to 24.5 s).


that market researchers keep in mind that nu-merous research techniques remain in their in-fancy, at least in terms of their application inmarketing research, and that further basic re-search is necessary to facilitate the confidentapplication of these techniques to marketing. Inthis context, the research presented in this arti-cle has served as a pilot to a comprehensiveproject, Exploring the Consumer’s Mind, whichbegan in Poland in 2007. On the basis of thefindings from the project Exploring the Con-sumer’s Mind, it should be possible to diagnose,in the precampaign stage, whether new ads (be-fore emission) can induce desirable consumerreactions. Eventually, this research should helpto establish the optimal number of ad exposuresand their time dynamics during the campaign.

In conclusion, neurophysiological measuresseem to be an objective supplement to subjec-tive, declarative data. When combined, thesetwo forms of modality may enable marketers toportray both conscious and subconscious con-sumer reactions to persuasive advertising(Damasio, 1994; LeDoux, 1996; Zaltman,2003).

References

Aaker, D. A., Stayman, D. M., & Hagerty, M. A.(1986). Warmth in advertising: Measurement, im-

pact, and sequence effects. Journal of ConsumerResearch, 4, 365–381.

Alwitt, L. F. (1985). EEG activity reflects the contentof commercials. In L. F. Alwitt & A. A. Mitchell(Eds.), Psychological processes and advertisingeffects: Theory, research, and applications (pp.209–219). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bolls, P. D., Lang, A., & Potter, R. (2001). The effectof message valence and listener arousal on atten-tion, memory, and facial muscular responses toradio advertisements. Communication Research, 5,627–651.

Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (2000). Affectivereactions to acoustic stimuli. Psychophysiol-ogy, 37, 204–215.

Braidot, N. P. (2005). Neuromarketing: Neuroecono-mıa y negocios [Neuromarketing: Neuroeconomicsand business]. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Norte–Sur SL.

Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Losch, M. E., & Kim,H. S. (1986). Electromyographic activity overfacial muscle regions can differentiate the va-lence and intensity of affective reactions. Jour-nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50,260 –268.

Cacioppo, J. T., Tassinary, L. G., & Berntson, G. C.(2000). Handbook of psychophysiology (2nd ed.).New York: Cambridge University Press.

Coan, J. A., Allen, J. J. B.. (2003). Frontal EEGasymmetry and the behavioral activation andinhibition systems. Psychophysiology, 40, 106 –114.

Figure 7. Arousal level (trace of skin conductance response during the exposition of thespots).


Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descarte’s error: Emotion,reason, and the human brain. New York: Put-nam’s Sons.

Davidson, R. J. (1993a). Cerebral asymmetry andemotion: Conceptual and methodological conun-drums. Cognition and Emotion, 7, 115–138.

Davidson, R. J. (1993b). The neuropsychology ofemotion and affective style. In M. Lewis & J. M.Haviland (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 143–154). New York: Guilford Press.

Davidson, R. J. (2004). What does the prefrontalcortex “do” in affect? Perspectives on frontal EEGasymmetry research. Biological Psychology, 67,219–233.

Davidson, R. J., & Rickman, M. (1999). Behavioralinhibition and the emotional circuitry of the brain:Stability and plasticity during the early childhoodyears. In L. A. Schmidt & J. Schulkin (Eds.),Extreme fear, shyness, and social phobia: Origins,biological mechanisms, and clinical outcomes (pp.67–87). New York: Oxford University Press.

Davidson, R. J., Schwartz, G. E., Saron, C., Bennett,J., & Goleman, D. J. (1979). Frontal versus parietalEEG asymmetry during positive and negative af-fect. Psychophysiology, 16, 202–203.

de Groot, P. (1996). Facial EMG and nonconsciousaffective priming. Unpublished master’s thesis,University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Neth-erlands.

Dimberg, U. (1986). Facial reactions to fear-relevantand fear-irrelevant stimuli. Biological Psychol-ogy, 23, 153–161.

Dimberg, U. (1990). Facial electromyography andemotional reactions. Psychophysiology, 27, 481–494.

Dimberg, U., Hansson, G., & Thunberg, M. (1998).Fear of snakes and facial reactions: A case of rapidemotional responding. Scandinavian Journal ofPsychology, 39, 75–80.

Dimberg, U., Thunberg, M., & Elmehed, K. (2000).Unconscious facial reactions to emotional facialexpressions. Psychological Science, 2, 86–89.

Fox, N. A. (1991). If it’s not left, it’s right: Electro-encephalograph asymmetry and the developmentof emotion. American Psychologist, 46, 863–872.

Fridlund, A. J., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Guidelinesfor human electromyographic research. Psycho-physiology, 23, 567–589.

Hazlett, R. L., & Hazlett, S. Y. (1999). Emotionalresponse to television commercials: Facial EMGvs. self-report. Journal of Advertising Research, 2,7–23.

Hietanen, J. K., Surakka, V., & Linnankoski, I.(1998). Facial electromyographic responses to vo-cal affect expressions. Psychophysiology, 35, 530–536.

Hopkins, R., & Fletcher, J. E. (1994). Electrodermalmeasurement: Particularly effective for forecasting

message influence on sales appeal. In A. Lang(Ed.), Measuring psychological responses to me-dia messages (pp. 113–132). Hillsdale, NJ: Erl-baum.

Huettel, S. A., Song, A. W., & McCarthy, G. (2004).Functional magnetic resonance imaging. Boston:Sinauer Associates.

Jones, N. A., & Fox, N. A. (1992), Electroencepha-logram asymmetry during emotionally evocativefilms and its relation to positive and negative af-fectivity. Brain and Cognition, 20, 280–299.

Kenning, P., Plassmann, H., Ahlert, D. (2007). Ap-plications of functional magnetic resonance imag-ing for market research. Qualitative Market Re-search, 2, 135–152.

LaBarbera, P. A., & Tucciarione, J. D. (1995). GRSreconsidered: A behavior-based approach to eval-uating and improving the sales potency of adver-tising. Journal of Advertising Research, 5, 33–53.

Lang, A., Greenwald, M. K., Bradley, M. M., &Hamm, A. O. (1993). Looking at pictures: Affec-tive, facial, visceral, and behavioural reactions.Psychophysiology, 3, 261–273.

Larsen, J. T., Norris, C. J., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2003).Effects of positive and negative affect on electro-myographic activity over zygomaticus major andcorrugator supercilii. Psychophysiology, 40, 776–785.

LeDoux, J. (1996). The emotional brain. New York:Simon & Shuster.

Ohme, R. K., & Pyl, P. (2006). Płytkie versus głe-bokie przetwarzanie komunikatow reklamowych[Low versus high processing of TV ads]. Market-ing i Rynek, 3, 30–34.

Olson, J. C., & Ray, W. J. (1985). Perspectives onpsychological assessment of psychological re-sponses to advertising. Unpublished manuscript,Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA.

Plassmann, H., Ambler, T., Braeutigam, S., & Ken-ning, P. (2007). What can advertisers learn fromneuroscience? International Journal of Advertis-ing, 26, 151–175.

Ravaja, N. (2004). Contributions of psychophysiol-ogy to media research: Review and recommenda-tions. Media Psychology, 2, 193–235.

Rothschild, M., & Hyun, Y. J. (1990). Predictingmemory for components of TV commercials fromEEG. Journal of Consumer Research, 4, 472–478.

Rothschild, M., Thorson, E., Reeves, B., Hirsch, J., &Goldstein, R. (1986). EEG activity and the pro-cessing of television commercials. CommunicationResearch, 2, 182–220.

Rotteveel, M., de Groot, P., Geutskens, A., & Phaf,R. H. (2001). Stronger suboptimal than optimalaffective priming? Emotion, 1, 348–364.

Schwartz, G. E., Fair, P. L., Salt, P., Mandel, M. R.,& Klerman, G. L. (1976). Facial expression and


imagery in depression: An electromyographicstudy. Psychosomatic Medicine, 38, 337–347.

Sutton, S. K., & Davidson, R. J. (1997). Prefrontalbrain asymmetry: A biological substrate of thebehavioral approach and inhibition systems. Psy-chological Science, 8, 204–210.

Swartz, B. E. (1998). Timeline of the history of EEGand associated field. Electroencephalography andClinical Neurophysiology, 106, 173–176.

Zaltman, G. (2003). How customers think: Essentialinsight into the mind of the market. Harvard, MA:Harvard Business School Press.

Members of Underrepresented Groups:Reviewers for Journal Manuscripts Wanted

If you are interested in reviewing manuscripts for APA journals, the APA Publications andCommunications Board would like to invite your participation. Manuscript reviewers are vital to thepublications process. As a reviewer, you would gain valuable experience in publishing. The P&CBoard is particularly interested in encouraging members of underrepresented groups to participatemore in this process.

If you are interested in reviewing manuscripts, please write APA Journals at [email protected] note the following important points:

• To be selected as a reviewer, you must have published articles in peer-reviewed journals. Theexperience of publishing provides a reviewer with the basis for preparing a thorough, objectivereview.

• To be selected, it is critical to be a regular reader of the five to six empirical journals that are mostcentral to the area or journal for which you would like to review. Current knowledge of recentlypublished research provides a reviewer with the knowledge base to evaluate a new submissionwithin the context of existing research.

• To select the appropriate reviewers for each manuscript, the editor needs detailed information.Please include with your letter your vita. In the letter, please identify which APA journal(s) youare interested in, and describe your area of expertise. Be as specific as possible. For example,“social psychology” is not sufficient—you would need to specify “social cognition” or “attitudechange” as well.

• Reviewing a manuscript takes time (1–4 hours per manuscript reviewed). If you are selected toreview a manuscript, be prepared to invest the necessary time to evaluate the manuscriptthoroughly.


Documents

Analysis of Neurophysiological Reactions to Advertising ...neurospire.com/pdfs/Ohme.pdf · Analysis of Neurophysiological Reactions to Advertising Stimuli ... by using electroencephalography